“Don’t bring negativity to my door.” –Maya Angelou. This quote tastefully disagrees with Barbara Ehrenreich’s argument in her essay “The Menace of Negative People.” In this essay I don’t agree with the fact that negativity is a positive personality. I believe you can be a positive realistic person, without being naïve. Being realistic to me does not mean that your perception to every situation is going to be negative. Yet, my perception is to be aware and conscientious to what is happening in the situation and who and what factors play in the situation.
Going through life as a negative, grumpy no good sayer sally, sounds terribly unflattering to one’s life. Going through life as a positive, dew drop, sun shining everyday darling does not seem …show more content…
Stated in Ehrenreich’s essay page 637, third paragraph “…….” I do not find myself aproving this quote due to the fact that positive people do not just want to be nourished and receive praise. Of course it is a lovely thing to receive, but that is not what the whole focus of being positive is about. Ehrenreich, makes positive people look like they like to receive and never give, which is a selfish way to look at positive people. In fact, she says comments about positive people making them seem like they are the selfish one’s; for example “….”. There is a difference between being positive and naïve. Being naïve is having an innocent characteristic about you; unlike optimistic is being able to have a positive attitude. In Ehrenreich’s essay, she tends to make positive people look naïve, when in fact a person can be positive and realistic without being naïve. Shown in (action for happiness.org) article on ….,“Whether we are naturally an optimist or more of a pessimist, it's impossible to know what the future holds. So perhaps the best of both worlds is to be a realistic optimist - someone who tends to maintain a positive outlook, but within the constraints of what they know about the world.” This article shows that it is possible to be positive and realistic, without being
Going through life as a negative, grumpy no good sayer sally, sounds terribly unflattering to one’s life. Going through life as a positive, dew drop, sun shining everyday darling does not seem …show more content…
Stated in Ehrenreich’s essay page 637, third paragraph “…….” I do not find myself aproving this quote due to the fact that positive people do not just want to be nourished and receive praise. Of course it is a lovely thing to receive, but that is not what the whole focus of being positive is about. Ehrenreich, makes positive people look like they like to receive and never give, which is a selfish way to look at positive people. In fact, she says comments about positive people making them seem like they are the selfish one’s; for example “….”. There is a difference between being positive and naïve. Being naïve is having an innocent characteristic about you; unlike optimistic is being able to have a positive attitude. In Ehrenreich’s essay, she tends to make positive people look naïve, when in fact a person can be positive and realistic without being naïve. Shown in (action for happiness.org) article on ….,“Whether we are naturally an optimist or more of a pessimist, it's impossible to know what the future holds. So perhaps the best of both worlds is to be a realistic optimist - someone who tends to maintain a positive outlook, but within the constraints of what they know about the world.” This article shows that it is possible to be positive and realistic, without being